and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Show Tags

In OG-13 SC-7 and SC-133 show with + noun+ participle construction as correct.

I understand why these answers are correct after reading the explanation, but I eliminated these answers on basis of this construction.

OG-13 SC-7

The intricate structure of the compound insect eye,with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, helps explain why scientists have assumed that it evolved independently of the vertebrate eye.

with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidiaPreposition + Noun + Participle

OG-13 SC-133

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rareKemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be onshrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

Show Tags

In OG-13 SC-7 and SC-133 show with + noun+ participle construction as correct.

I understand why these answers are correct after reading the explanation, but I eliminated these answers on basis of this construction.

OG-13 SC-7

The intricate structure of the compound insect eye,with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, helps explain why scientists have assumed that it evolved independently of the vertebrate eye.

with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidiaPreposition + Noun + Participle

OG-13 SC-133

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's Ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

with laws requiringpreposition + noun + participle

Kindly let me know where I am making the mistake.

Regards

Dear dbcjr66,I'm happy to respond. This is a very tricky issue here.

The structure "with" + [noun] + [participle] is not acceptable when it contains an action that would more appropriately be expressed as a subordinate clause. ..... with stocks rising in the fourth quarter ....should be ....when stocks rise in the fourth quarter ...or ... as stocks rise in the fourth quarter ... or ... because stocks rise in the fourth quarter ...

Notice, first of all, that, in order to create the incorrect structure, we have to have an active participle --- that is, the present -ing participle. If the participle is a past participle, i.e. an passive participle, such as "called", then this is not going to be a problem at all. Thus, SC13 SC #7 is irrelevant to this discussion.

Now, a couple things are going on in OG13, SC #133. First of all, the words "compliance" or "comply" idiomatically take the preposition "with", so we have no choice --- the laws of idiom demand that we use "with" in this context. The other issue is more subtle, and concerns: what exactly is the object of the preposition "with"? If the object is genuinely a noun, and then we are merely modifying the noun, that is 100% acceptable, but if the object is the entire action of the participial phrase, that's unacceptable. Here's the way to tell. Drop the participial phrase, and see if the sentence makes sense:... saying that their compliance with laws protects adult sea turtles. That makes perfect sense. We don't really know what "laws", but this sentence is meaningful as is. This means that object of "with" is genuinely just the noun "laws", and the participial phrase just fills in detail --- what laws? what kind of laws?

This is very different from the mistake construction:With stocks rising in the fourth quarter, the brokerage house expects to reap substantial profits.There, the object of "with" is not simply the noun "stocks" but the entire action, the fact hat stocks will rise. If we drop the participial phrase ...With stocks, the brokerage house expects to reap substantial profits.... this has a different meaning. It's not just stocks that will help the brokers --- it's the fact that stock will rise. We need a full [noun]+[verb] subordinate clause to contain a full-blown action. Because stocks rise in the fourth quarter, the brokerage house expects to reap substantial profits.

As always in GMAT SC, you cannot rely purely on the mathematical relationships of the parts of speech. You always have to think about meaning. People think that the GMAT SC is only a test of grammar --- it does test grammar, but more importantly, it tests meaning. That's where your focus must be if you want to be successful with this question type.

Do all these distinctions make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Show Tags

Hey Mike!"with" + "noun" + "present participle"X have seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hangingAlthough it is the best possible choice among the options, i thought i should discuss it.If we drop the present participle,X have seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs.

I am not able to decide whether this makes sense..

Dear tushain,I'm happy to respond.

This is a very subtle distinction, which is precisely why the GMAT absolutely loves it. The structure:"with" + "noun" + "participle" is wrong when the participle encapsulates an action, when the "doing" of the action is itself important. In this example, dropping the participle "hanging" does leave us with a somewhat awkward sentence. Nevertheless, "hanging" is clearly not an "action" --- no one is trying "to hang" or engaging in the action of "hanging." It is very clearly a simple description. It's a distinction that is extremely clear, but it's hard to explain it in a way that makes the rule explicit. Dropping the participle to see if it changes the meaning is a "trick" that is somewhat reliable, but the point is to develop a sense for the underlying logical distinction. Don't be too attached to the tricks. Don't be too literalistic in your interpretation of grammar rules. Language is living, and through experience, one can develop a sense for it. Nothing can replace this experience. That's why it's crucial to develop a habit of reading.

Show Tags

Consider this sentence: Because of a law passed in 1993 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them. (Source: GMAT Prep)

In this sentence we have "of a law passed". Here as I understood doing of "passed" is important over here. Can you please explain why this construction is correct.

ThanksRohit
_________________

Middle of nowhere!

Last edited by rohitmanglik on 17 Sep 2015, 20:51, edited 1 time in total.

Show Tags

Consider this sentence: Because of a law passed in 1993 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them. (Source: GMAT Prep)

In this sentence we have "of a law passed". Here as I understood doing of "passed" is important over here. Can you please explain why this construction is correct over here.

Show Tags

17 Sep 2015, 21:00

Wow! Thanks Mike. You are a savior.

Can we reproduce this concept with other prepositions as well?

e.g.: Because of a law passed in 1993 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them. (Source: GMAT Prep): Correct

Part under discussion: of a law passed

Above rule(mentioned in the link) seems working over here as well, can we generalize above rule to other prepositions (at least to a few) as well?

Consider this sentence: Because of a law passed in 1993 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them. (Source: GMAT Prep)

In this sentence we have "of a law passed". Here as I understood doing of "passed" is important over here. Can you please explain why this construction is correct over here.

Show Tags

e.g.: Because of a law passed in 1993 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold gold in the form of bullion or coins, immigrants found that on arrival in the United States they had to surrender all of the gold they had brought with them. (Source: GMAT Prep): Correct

Part under discussion: of a law passed

Above rule(mentioned in the link) seems working over here as well, can we generalize above rule to other prepositions (at least to a few) as well?

Dear Rohit,

I'm happy to respond. Yes, we can generalize. The preposition "with" is a particularly common one, in both the correct & incorrect constructions, but we can say the same thing for the compound preposition "because of." For some other prepositions, the analogous structure would never be used, and with still others, the situation is more nuanced. But yes, we draw the same distinction for these two: for "with" and for "because of."